Parenting: Cameron's childhood adviser says we're all getting it wrong. Is she right?

[HelenMumsnet]

Morning.

Claire Perry, MP, David Cameron's adviser on childhood, has been telling the papers today that Britain's parents have got it all wrong.

In The Times (£), the Telegraph and the Daily Mail, Perry is quoted as saying...

• We fill every moment of our children's lives with organised activities, "damaging their lives" by leaving them unable to fend for themselves when they go to university.

• We should 'snoop' on our children's text messages and internet exchanges. Perry says that, as a society, we are all 'complicit' in allowing a culture where youngsters can make inappropriate contact with strangers at all hours of the day and night. She adds, "Most parents are too busy, don't know the words, aren't aware their children are doing it. They are living in digital oblivion."

Do you agree with either of her points?

Or not?

Please do post and tell!

Boris Johnson's dad was lecturing us all re letting kids run feral and the woes of helicoptering.As his kids were educated privately with hoards of activities I suspect on site and a massive pad for kids to run wild safely around at home he too is talking out of his backside.

A cynic might think these wealthy Tories don't want all the riff raff lower classes in competition for uni places further down the line.

It pains me that I have to agree with anything Tory related but I actually do agree with both these points.

I have spent my career working with young people and I have repeatedly observed the following: young children / teens who can happily spend unstructured time on their own tend to have better mental health and better educational / life outcomes than those who can't. There is something about having to spend time alone that teaches kids about managing their expectations - and indeed coping with boredom and delayed gratification.

A couple of enjoyable hobbies for a child is great but I recently ran into an acquaintance who I hadn't seen in a while and immediately had to listen to the list of six activities that her DC were taken to every week (that's 6 each). It was like a comedy sketch of the pushy middle class mother. I would have laughed if I hadn't been exhausted just listening to the list

The trouble is it immediately breeds paranoia amongst other mothers: oh god, should little Charlie also be going to x, y and z to avoid being left behind?! Our DD is still a baby so have a while to psych myself up for this. I also think that unless we have had a very disordered upbringing parents need to rely on their own gut instincts and common sense more in raising children. There's too much navel gazing and hand wringing over the whole thing.

As for the digital stuff I think it is more important to give kids the right knowledge and sense of consequence that they make good choices themselves - but a degree of snooping is essential, especially with the 11-14 yr olds.

Cameron's advisor on Childhood ought to know that stimulation in in the early years is very important. This was the basis of the children's centres that the previous government set up, to help children develop, during the 0-5 years. Given that this government have cut sport and the arts in school, he really ought to know better than have his team criticise parents who try hard to provide stimulating activities for children. I bet his children do lots too.

I would definitely snoop.

There is so much horrendous stuff online - I am so glad my DCs are adult and I don't have the thought of what they might be seeing worrying me. Some of the stuff I have inadvertantly seen has haunted me for months.

Add to that some peer pressure (possibly when they are early teens and don't know any better) and they have probably seen more than we will ever.

And I don't think that someone who has their DCs at boarding school is in a position to advise ANYONE on childcare. They should know better and just shut up. A bit like Diane Abbot - don't do what I do, do what I say.

Something else has just dawned on me. I went to university with a lot of students who had been to boarding / public school. Many of them had no idea how to make egg on toast, no intention of learning, and realistically, no need to at all. They went straight from catered boarding schools, where they passed lots of exams, directed Beckett plays and played rugby, to Oxbridge, where they ate in college, had their rooms done by bedders, did the same activities as school, and from there into well paid jobs, frequent eating out, and having cleaners in their early twenties. No one worried that they weren't wasting their time learning how to change the hoover bag.
(Socialising with people like this I found that many of them were very skilled in manipulating those with lower expectations of being served, to serve them - but that is another issue)

anyway - is the issue that ^too many people are learning to direct Beckett plays, and in fact the wrong people?

It's not that I disagree with letting kids get on with it or parents making sure they know what's happening on the internet etc, but where is she getting her evidence? They're not very measurable things, are they?

Is the 'too many activities' stuff just an excuse to cut funding for kids' activities?

I don't think parenting (beyond corporal punishment) is really an area for government legislation. Which is lucky, because I'm not sure exactly what concrete laws she would hope to bring into place based on these statements.

Frankly parents can't win. They're always in the wrong. No matter what they do.

Point 2 on internet safety is valid, however it would have more force if CEOP weren't not being merged into the National Crime Agency as part of cuts in policing. The Head of CEOP resigned in protest as he saw that his division, there to protect children on the internet, was being watered down.

Consistent? I think not, keep CEOP separate and focusing on what it is doing, if is working, don't meddle with it.

They are not going to go straight in to well paid jobs these days- that is a thing if the past- so they need to learn.

If you take out the children who genuinely want to do loads of activities, and the children who are involved in after school activities which are actually a form of wrap around child care, are large numbers of children being over scheduled?

Who would be able to afford it?

for Claire P as surely sending her kids to boarding school is the ultimate in filling every moment of your children's lives ?

I would like to see Tory Claire and Call Me Dave take 3 actual real women (I'll volunteer) and give a timetable (costed) of how we should be bringing up our children.

They would be fucking toast.

I think you'd find they'd be biscuits, Linerunner, this is mn after all ;)

Would they be Rich Tea?

Claire Perry if you are reading this, shall we do a life swap for, say, just a week?

I agree with Claire Perry.

I don't see the argument that we 'can't do right' I do however see a generation of teens and up and coming teens who may be increasingly hard work to over stretched parents...
Claire Perry is an advisor - put there to help. She says it as she sees it not to beat us with a sharp stick .

We don't need to demonise her

I see an argument that parents need to be doing lots of structured activities with their children, or for their childcarers to do so, emanating from the State and indeed being written into statute - childminders having to follow an early years curriculum, childen's centres (Sure Start) offering certain structred activities from birth, etc etc.

Structured activities are also expected to be offered in Extended School environments 8am-6pm for all children.

But Tory Claire seems to have suggested that taking advantage of such structured activities may be ... wrong?

I'd love her to come and show me the 'correct way'. On film, on camera.

I really think the missing word from her argument was play - children need time to play. But play is woefully un-appreciated and misunderstood in this country even for young children, and even by many educationalists and experts. So, shouldn't be surprised really that it gets no mention from the prime-minister's adviser on childhood.

As she stumbles around in the dark looking for the right word the best she could come up with is "they need time to be bored"

MNHQ, can we get Perry in for a webchat? Can we? Can we please? Can we pleeeeeeeeeaaaaassssseeee? Gowaaaan, I'll be yer best friend, I'll invite you to my birthday party and everyfink. It'd be frikkin amazing.

Absolutely, Juggling.

Yes, Linerunner. In fact, most obviously, the childcare ratios thing is all about increasing structure to reduce adult labour (staff hours, input) in taking care of children. A lack of structure is in fact very labour intensive and much more demanding of individuals and society in very subtle ways. There is no more room for any more demands on anyone because everyone is stretched to the limit with economic imperatives - exactly the sort of imperatives that Truss wants to intensify

Yes, I too would like to see a webchat on MN with Claire Perry. If she is the PM's adviser on childhood, I would like the chance to ask about her credentials and the evidence base on which she is basing her policy statements.

The social construction of childhood is not 'owned' by one policy adviser.

But some political figures can make huge contributions in areas of social policy.

If Perry wants to be one of those, she needs to have good ideas, a very deep social conscience based on witnessing real life crap and helping those involved, and an ability to debate with lots of people, in lots of ways, and not just to talk over people on Question Time.

Is the "tons of activities" a middle class thing? We couldnt afford to do this anyway, some of DS friends have 1, if not 2 activities a night - it must be exhausting.

Facebooks, all DS1s notifications come in via me

internet - he KNOWS I check the history after a friend looked at porn - he got a stern grilling from me and I informed their parents so he wont be doing that again.

The most difficult thing is the xbox as live doesnt really seem to be set up to be "safe" it becomes very labour intensive if its set to "child" - they dont make friends with anyone they dont know in real life but pretty much all of their friends do. DS 1 was so concerned about one person one of DS2's friends had befriended that he got me to have a word with his parent.

Does this "advisor" have children? Im assuming the Nanny has been passed these instructions.